“The Think Long Committee Report was supposed to be a bipartisan path to rebuilding California’s future, not a dangerous detour that would hurt students and the poor. Educators are alarmed by these recommendations to raise taxes on the poor, lower taxes for corporations, dismantle Proposition 98– the state’s minimum school funding law – and avoid repaying $10 billion already owed to public schools and students,” said Dean E. Vogel, president of the California Teachers Association in a statement.
As reported by the Sacramento Bee, half of the money raised by Think Long’s call to charge sales taxes on services would go to K-12 schools. Included also within the plan would be an elimination of a constitutional requirement which increases state funding for schools in good years to make up for previous cuts.
The paper also reported that the CTA has taken issue with the aspect of Thing Long’s proposal which appears to make tax revenue conditionally available to the state education system-based on how effectively California’s students are being educated- in addition to bringing teacher tenure and seniority into the discussion.
“We believe such new funding should not be automatically given to a system that is failing to educate millions of Californians. It instead should be tied to improving performance of K-12 schools, as a result of rigorous evaluation of teachers, as well as curbs on automatic teacher tenure and seniority,” Thing Long’s report stated.
Although not necessarily coming from the same angle, the California Republican Party hit the proposal for taxes that would be levied on certain services. “I am literally saddened to hear that some believe that a massive new category of taxation is the answer to California’s economic or budget problems,” said Tom Del Beccaro, chairman of the California Republican Party.
“A new tax, which will be subject to future increases on all small business including business consultants, most independent contractors, financial advisors, insurance brokers, real estate brokers, travel agents, housekeepers, and the accountants and lawyers that service them, will weigh this economy down even more and produce less tax revenue over time not more,” he said.
Opposition to the proposal by both the California Teachers Association and the California Republican Party came in a little more than one week, according to the dates of these reports. While the proposal would reduce personal and income tax rates, it would tax services that aren’t currently taxed.
The foundations backed an effort called California Forward, a consortium of civic and political figures that backed such incremental reforms as an independent redistricting commission and a "top-two" primary election system, both of which were endorsed by voters.
Many of those involved with California Forward then segued into the Think Long Committee for California, bankrolled by billionaire Nicolas Berggruen's personal foundation, which on Monday unveiled its incremental prescription for California.
The 23-page proposal's two most important points would be a major tax overhaul – extending sales taxes to services and flattening the personal income tax – that would raise about $10 billion more a year, and the creation of a "Citizens Council for Government Accountability" that would be, in effect, a new layer of government to oversee the other layers.
Berggruen is prepared, it's said, to spend $20 million to sell the plan to voters. And that's where reform gets messy.
While the scheme has some commendable aspects, it falls short of the top-to-bottom overhaul that California probably needs. It's also likely to draw opposition from unions, and its tax provisions complicate plans by unions and Gov. Jerry Brown to put their own tax increase on the ballot next year.
The Think Long tax plan resembles one from a blue-ribbon commission a couple of years ago - not surprisingly, since the commission's chairman, Gerald Parsky, also is a Think Long member. And it, like the Parsky commission proposal, would appear to shift tax burdens from the wealthy to middle-income taxpayers.
If voters were to face two major tax measures – and a third is also being bandied about – the most likely result would be confusion that would bode ill for all.
No comments:
Post a Comment